Unilever Kenya Limited v Ntinyari (Cause E155 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 274 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court let a respondent back into a case despite a wrong date in a consent, showing courts correct procedural slips to reach fair outcomes.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Respondent's Motion dated 25 September 2024 seeking review of the directions of 6 June 2024 and leave to defend should be allowed
- 2.How to treat the parties' consent of 3 December 2024 which referenced orders of 26 June 2024 rather than 6 June 2024
Key legal issues
#Effect of a consent order referencing a wrong date for court directions
The Court found the consent referred to orders not made by it (26 June 2024 vs 6 June 2024) and could not discern whether the error was inadvertent or typographical, but proceeded to allow the Motion on its merits.
The Claimant filed no response or submissions opposing the Motion. Since the consent sought to compromise the Motion by setting aside the undefended-cause direction and deeming the Respondent's pleadings properly on record, the Court allowed the Motion substantially in those terms, correcting the date discrepancy by granting the substantive relief sought.
Legal principles established
#- Where a consent refers to directions/orders not issued by the Court on the stated date, the Court may allow the underlying application on its own merits notwithstanding the erroneous date reference.
Court orders
#- 1.The order that the Cause proceeds as undefended issued on 6 June 2024 is set aside
- 2.The Respondent's Response, witness statements and documents are admitted onto the record
- 3.Each party to bear own costs of the Motion
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent powers of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over its own interlocutory directions (not expressly cited in the ruling)
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The order that the Cause proceeds as undefended issued on 6 June 2024 is set aside.
The Respondent's Response, witness statements and documents are admitted onto the record.
Each party to bear own costs of the Motion.
Issues in the judgment
#The parties' consent references orders of 26 June 2024, but the Court's directions were issued on 6 June 2024; the Court itself flagged the discrepancy.
The name of the Claimant is not disclosed in the ruling; only the Respondent (Caroline Ntinyari) is named.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Unilever Kenya Limited v Ntinyari (Cause E155 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 274 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the excerpt (Employment and Labour Relations Court Cause). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/274/eng@2025-02-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.